AMTEX SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 574/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 June 2017AY 2006-074 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that it has the power to entertain a point of law for the first time if the facts are available. Therefore, the issue was restored to the AO for verification of the claim for deduction u/s.10A.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction u/s.10B, which was initially allowed but later denied. The assessee alternatively claimed deduction u/s.10A, which was denied by the AO and CIT(A) as it was not made in the original return. The Tribunal considered the Supreme Court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee can claim deduction u/s.10A for the first time before the Tribunal, and if the AO can be directed to verify such a claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A,Section 10B,Section 143(3),Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

Hearing: 12.06.2017Pronounced: 12.06.2017

आदेश / O R D E R

PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

ITA No.574/Mds/2017 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Chennai, in dated 12.01.2017 for the AY 2006-07.

ITA No.574/Mds/2017 :- 2 -:

2.

Mr.Sasi Kumar, JCIT, represented on behalf of the Respondent and Mrs.J. Sree Vidya, Advocate represented on behalf of the Appellant.

3.

It is submitted by the Ld.AR that only issue in the assessee’s appeal was that the assessee is a company which had filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year claiming deduction u/s.10B of the Act.

The same was originally allowed in the assessment completed u/s.143(3) of the Act. Subsequently, the same was re-opened and the claim of deduction u/s.10B was denied. The assessee had alternatively claimed deduction u/s.10A of the Act. The assessee claim of deduction u/s.10A of the Act was denied by the AO on the ground that the same was not made in the return of income filed by the assessee. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) upheld the finding of the AO. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the AY 2006-07 was the initial assessment year. It was a further submission that for the AYs 2007-08 & 2008-09, the assessee claim of deduction u/s.10B has been allowed. For the assessment year 2009-10, the assessee’s claim of deduction u/s.10B had been denied by the AO. On appeal, Ld.CIT(A) had granted benefit of deduction u/s.10A to the assessee. It was a submission that the Revenue has not preferred appeal against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for the AY 2009-10. It was a further submission that for the AY 2010-11, the DRP has directed the AO to verify the claim of deduction u/s.10A and AO as per the direction of the DRP has verified the claim and granted the assessee the benefit of deduction u/s.10A. It was a submission that the assessee had no objection if the AO is directed to ITA No.574/Mds/2017 :- 3 -: verify the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.10A if directed by the Tribunal in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court categorically held as under:

4.

The decision in question is that the power of the Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is to entertain for the first time a point of law provided the fact on the basis of which the issue of law can be raised before the Tribunal. The decision does not in any way relate to the power of the Assessing Officer to entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return. In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the civil appeal. However, we make it clear that the issue in this case is limited to the power of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. There shall be no order as to costs.

4. In reply, the Ld.DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and the CIT(A).

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. On perusal of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd., which clearly shows that the Tribunal does have the powers to entertain for the first time a point of law provided the facts on the basis of which the issue of law can be raised is available before the Tribunal. In view of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. referred to supra, we restore the issue in this appeal to the file of the AO to verify the claim of deduction u/s.10A in the case of the assessee and grant accordingly.

ITA No.574/Mds/2017 :- 4 -:

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on June 12, 2017, at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →